Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Aah, it's been such a long time since we had a Jake Watch newscast. Jake has valiantly stepped in again to help us out, this time as a posing as a wartime correspondant. Isn't he all reassuring yet authoritarian? And FYI, BBC stands for britpopbaby Broadcasting Corporation and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

A BIT OF A SPRUCEIn the coming weeks Jake Watch is getting a makeover. As for the theme all I can say is it's prehaps the best idea anyone has ever had in the history of time. We’ve labelled it an ‘ironic’ makeover. Here is a sneak preview:

Oh yeah, baby, it’s gonna be hot.

HOT OFF THE PRINTING PRESSIn other Jake Watch news britpopbaby would like to dance around gleefully because the T Shirt crisis is finally sorted. The T-Shirts should be available in 3 to 4 styles and a variety of colours. At this point I’d like to mention how long it took me to grapple with shipping prices and how majorly confusing the Royal Mail website is. Yes, all T Shirts will be delievered via her Majesty’s personal post service – how exciting? She hasn’t expressed an interest in buying a shirt herself yet but man, these things are gonna be so bitchin’ everyone will want one. The price will be around £13 ($24, 19 euros – dude, I do not have a euro key, why haven’t I noticed that before!). Any long sleeved tops will cost a little more and vest tops will be a little cheaper. I’m now in the middle of working out how the bejesus to set up an ordering system. Give me a few days.

As soon as the first batch is printed (it’s 25 at a time) Poppa Gyllenhaal or as I have recently heard him dubbed, ‘Team Leader’, will be getting his. It will be tightly bound together with the Boo shirt and off they shall go on their merry way across the Atlantic.NOT SAD BUT MOSTLY TRUEIn more Jake Watch news, aah, a moral dilemma. It’s been relayed to us here at Jake Watch HQ (moving soon to a carved out volcano near you) that Jake doesn’t really appreciate discussions about his personal life. It’s common sense really, who the hell would? Now usually I’d argue that young Gyllenhaal threw himself to the lions by becoming a Hollywood actor and the internet is a free for all so there is no point worrying about it. I also hoped he’d be blissfully unaware of all things internet but, alas, nope.

Now, it’s difficult for Jake Watch to take the moral high ground on any matter when we, essentially, have no morals (hey, I was raised Anglican, it’s not my fault). But then something was said that made britpopbaby think (holy shit!). Jake Watch has been deemed ‘responsible’ (responsible in a good way, not responsible for any strife). This is the first time, as anyone in britpopbaby’s life can attest to, that she has been called responsible. When she was 15 her parents trusted her to have a house party but it ended with 2 people being hospitalised and she really hasn’t been allowed to do anything since (at this point britpopbaby would like to say that it totally wasn’t her fault, how was she supposed to know Sammy Giles had never drank Hooch before because it was against her religion or something). Anyway, this is a big deal. Therefore we (prophecygirl, britpopbaby and sweet baby jesus) have decided to keep our noses out of Jake’s damn business.

This place is all about the funnies. If Jake wants to go bong it up with McNoganinny, Thighstrong and Richard O’Brien then it ain’t none of our beeswax. Paparazzi pictures will still be posted, mainly because my determination to finish Paparazzi Bingo outweighs any feelings of guilt or remorse, but we’ll be concentrating on the comedy value.

Also, squeeing and gushing over how hot he happens to look and how, like, totally radical those jeans are is in no way as bad as gossiping about his life choices. We have to remember that Jake Watch is linked at Stephen Gyllenhaal’s page and so we don’t want anything here that is likely to offend any Gyllenhaal.

We can’t stop what is said in the comments so all of this is basically some long-winded way of saying future Jake Watch posts will concentrate on making you laugh not questioning Jake’s personal life.

As Peter Kay once said, “There is a picture of her Majesty the Queen on that wall and as far as you’re concerned she might as well be sat in the front row. You get me?”

I promise next time there is news, we'll make Jake do this in podcast form. Naked.

If you've got any questions (relating to the post, not like, why do men have nipples or what would happen if aliens came and stole the moon) then ask away.

Love you long time,brits and prophecygirl (yeah, that's right, we're dividing the blame).

EDIT: I hoped I'd worded the above carefully but just to make things clear. No one has said to me, 'Jake hates you talking about his private life and if you don't stop he'll send you poisoned apples'. A person who I greatly respect and trust just said something that made me think. That's all. This is a personal thing, it's not Jake saying to his sheep, 'Look, flock, don't be gettin' all up in my shit, capiche?'. Like I said, to me it's common sense - no-one wants their life picked apart by people on the internet.

I'm taking the day off because I feel hassled but before I go, some reiterations:

No-one has commanded me to do anything. No orders have come down from on high. I'm not affiliated with any Gyllenhaal, never have been and don't "think" I am.

Jake Watch is not striving for 100% approval from anyone. Everything posted here is the opinion of britpopbaby, prophecygirl and soon, if she gets her ass in gear, Anneka.

If I did work for Jake's PR people/ his Dad/ Boo I'd be asking for a pay raise right about now and perhaps a month off due to stress.

This blog is a labour of love. Please respect that it is a creative outlet above anything else. Jake Watch has NO agenda.

All that was said was that I won't be dissecting Jake's private life in MY posts. Not that I ever really have in a serious manner. YOU may talk about whatever YOU want until you're blue in the face.

Paparazzi pictures are a difficult subject but seens the majority of this blog is based around them I'm not stopping posting them. Yes, they are an invasion of his privacy but I think the difference comes in how you react to a paparazzi picture.

The Austin post was FILLER. It was in GOOD HUMOUR. It meant NOTHING. This blog is not monitored by anyone and this post did not result in any military-esque clamp down. This blog is owned by ME and I will talk about whatever I want. So CHILL out.

The links to Waiting For Toothy and Wikipedia were removed because I wanted to remove them.

I'm not a homophobe but thanks for speculating. I am however an idiotophobe.

Nope, there is no difference between speculating whether Jake is with a man or woman. I never said there was and I'm pretty sure I've been over this before so you might want to let it go before you cause yourself a stomach ulcer.

I understand that Jake has said he is flattered to be called bisexual because it means he can play more roles. I do not however remember him saying, 'I'm flattered that you would discuss my personal life to great extent on the internet, honestly there is nothing I'd love more. I also love how you cloak it in pro-gay agenda and think that it's in some way superior to all other discussions'. Okay, that's a little harsh but I think it's clear. That's why the WFT link is no more.

I'd like to thank everyone who got it the first time around and to everyone else thanks for MISunderstanding, MISinterpretating and jumping to conclusions. People have come so close to ruining this for me so I'd like to thank my loyal readers for sticking up for me. People need to realise that I'm not some upstanding member of Jake fandom, there is no need to get personal and I shouldn't have to explain my actions to this extent. This is just a humourous little blog and it's causing no harm. It's meant to be a fun, relaxed place and getting yourself so worked up about what I think of pap pics and what I'm going to do about such and such is worrying me. Ask yourself what you think is right for you and go with it.

This is the last discussion I'm going to have about this so if anyone at some point in the future has an issue then please feel free to email me your essays.

As Stephen Gyllenhaal alluded, maybe we should spend less time analyising and fretting about Jake and more time concentrating on ourselves.

Okay? Can people please chill the fuck out now? Like any of this was ever important to begin with? Seriously, go and watch Donnie Darko or The Good Girl or Brokeback and remind yourself why you're here in the first place.

lol,muffin. I thought my eyes were playing tricks on me but you did actually post three times :))

Brits and PG: first,the makeover will be FAB!!! They're genius work!Are you working on becoming a pro in design? cause you are!second, relating Jake's privacy,I couldn't agree more.We're mature enough,we can handle it very nice and classy..you showed us how,Brits! uhmm..plus,there's a forum out there too..there are no links to that,are there?:D

Brit am SO looking forward to t-shirts. I am on a starvation diet and doing free weights and everything to get ready for mine.Looking forward to makeover very much. Of Jake Watch, too. I am wholly comfortablewith keeping out of Jake's personal life. Kinda happy about it even. As long as agents are still permitted to do extensive surveillance and I can continue to lust after his thighs...wait I meant EYEs, damned keyboard!... I'm good with it. I love hanging out here mostly bcz it's a great time with smart, literate people. I think this blog has a great perspective.And I like the fact that we have planes, boats and bicycles at our disposal...

24, 19 € is a bit expensive, I'll check thouse vest tops, but I'll buy one anyways. I'm glad you've already sorted out your T-shirt collection, I want to see the colors gama and sizes of the shirts. I bet Poppa G will enjoy his, and so classy from you, Pg -all your site policy- to make that decision of respect toward Jake. He doesn't deserve less.

Okay I totally get decency. I don't practice it but I get it. The price for success I suppose is losing your freedom a bit. If your linked to a Gyllenhaalian site can't very well go all expose' on their asses but at the same time, when does this stop? Is this just a nice adjustment so that all parties involved arent' squicked out? Or is it a *gulp* first step in making Jake Watch a semi-official site filled with boring posts designed to wet the panties of his PR team? Your humor is stellar brit, but I know if a Gyllenhaalengaard wanted me to switch from writing RPS slash to say something less intrusive like a viral campaign devoted to squashing the entire notion of Jake's non-heterosexuality. Consider it squashed. I'd totally be the Gyllenhaalengaardian's bitch.

This of course leaves me int a quandry. I NEVER EVER EVER say anything that Jake would be remotely comfortable with. Oh I'll comment on his tremendous acting and his pretty round eyes but for the most part my entire identity on the net is wrapped up in putting him in elaborate sexual situations with various men (esp. Saarsy and Saarsy's his brother! How sick am I?!) Doesnt' matter that I've gone on record stating that I think he's strait just matters that in Squall's Fantasy Land (the trippiest place on earth ya dig) Jake is total boy fodder and he's a bottom no less! Sheesh! I gotta rethink things. Don't want Jakey to suffer belly rumblings on my account. ... I'll come back when I can figure out something un-dirty to say about Jake. ... Might be a while.

You can say whatever comes into your fiflthy little mind, squall! I wasn't referring to that kind of stuff. Like I said, the comments are still a free for all. For example, if a new pic of Jake dry-humping Austin shows up then you can say, wow that's hot, it makes me want to do this, this and this (do you like how I'm using a specific example just for you)...okay, I'm sure where I'm going with this.

//Or is it a *gulp* first step in making Jake Watch a semi-official site filled with boring posts designed to wet the panties of his PR team?//

Squall you spoke my mind!

I certainly hope this is not the case... but then I trust Britpopbaby will make the right judgement on what's suited and what's not... god knows, I wouldnt' know how to define "personal life". Consider that Boo is Jake's personal life too, right?

Oooo winter's right. The question of why Boogaloo was leashed and not Big Daddy Atticus is speculating about his personal life isn't it? Hmmm slippery slope but I know brit can pilot us to a middle ground.

Damn! I knew this could get tricky. Basically Jake Watch is continuing the path it's on - gentle mocking. I'm trying to think of an example that would offend anyone in particular...

Okay, say he is spotted out with Paris Hilton having a good time. I will post something humourous like, 'Maybe Boo wants in with Tinkerbell' but y'know, better. I will not go, 'EWWWWWWWWWWWW! Why the HELL are you hanging around with that HO, let's dissect this to the nth degree'. Because if Jake wants to hang out with Paris Hilton (barf) then he will and if Paris Hilton is his friend/lover/co-star then he won't like us being really mean and stuff.

Guys, I don't think we have anything to worry about with Brit and the tone of this site. I am sure Atticus and Boo are still fair game to talk about, lol. As she said we can still comment the way we want too.

However, I can understand and respect Jake's feelings. Yes, he has put himself out there in the public eye. But the speculation about his love life and sexuality has gotten out of hand, imo and it sounds that he feels that way. I know in his last interviews he would no longer comment on his personal life specifically about him and Kirsten because it had gotten insane. I don't take that as saying this site had to be just fluffy PR. I think Brit has and will do an amazing job with her postings, while at the same time respecting Jake and his families feelings. JMO.

Sounds fair in theory, but i'm not sure what that will mean in practice.I guess I just have to (no pun intended)watch. Does that mean you are going all Gilded Moose? Satire sans the jabs?With the combo of anneka and PG, this should be fun(hopefully).

Damn! I knew this could get tricky. Basically Jake Watch is continuing the path it's on - gentle mocking. I'm trying to think of an example that would offend anyone in particular...

Okay, say he is spotted out with Paris Hilton having a good time. I will post something humourous like, 'Maybe Boo wants in with Tinkerbell' but y'know, better. I will not go, 'EWWWWWWWWWWWW! Why the HELL are you hanging around with that HO, let's dissect this to the nth degree'. Because if Jake wants to hang out with Paris Hilton (barf) then he will and if Paris Hilton is his friend/lover/co-star then he won't like us being really mean and stuff.

Okay, I can totally understand that because there have been lots of hurtful and nasty things around the internet about the people Jake has hung around with, be it Kirsten, Austin, Lance, Matt, etc. that I am sure it would not be cool to see people he cared about disrespected.

I understand and agree about not discussing Jake's personal life, but I never thought that Jake Watch did much of that anyway. Can you tell us what kinds of posts we'll no longer see? Are things like joking about his dogs' body language off limits?

Dude, dog body language better still be on the menu. That's one of my all-time favorite things! I think there's a big difference between drawing conclusions about a dog's thoughts based on body language and doing the same thing with a person. Dogs, for instance, don't really have thoughts.

I don't think the tone will really change that much at all. I think this is more about making a statement that there are some things that just won't be discussed in the posts. I think the kick-ass new design scheme will make it easier to stick to this. (Apparently I'm starting every sentence today with "I think.")

I with you anon. I sort of maintain that Jake Watch has never really crossed that line between comedy and intrusion.

All Jake Watch features shall remain. Nothing is going to change really. It probably didn't need mentioning but I felt it was important because someone called me responsible and it made me all warm inside. I'm putting it on my CV.

Dear future employer,britpopbaby is responsible (in a good way)love The Gyllenhaals.

The gildedmoose is awesome! They do jab. They just don't jab Jake because Jake is beautiful and perfect. Althought they did kind of call him a prostitute in their last posts about him when he's talking to the person in the car. That's the meanest they've ever posted about him and considering what they say about La Lohan and her ilk that's pretty tame.

See, The Gilded Moose is a perfect example. That site is ironic and hilarious. They're just making a joke out of a picture that obv isn't true so it's hella funny. Plus they call Jake 'The Chosen One' so it's all love, baby.

Sorry BPBaby, I like your humour and all, you have a really clever way of putting things and they always make me smile, but I have to say that even though it's true this blog was never focused on Jake Gyllenhaal's private life, there where things that state the contrary. Why the post on Austin Nichols? Everyone knows why they are being linked, and it's not because of plain friendship. Why was the WFT link there at all if the blog focused on jake's sexuality from day one? It's not to argue, I'm just sayin.

As long as (a) my dreamy musings on Jake's sandwich/cupcake/general carb eating, (b) my even more dreamy musings on the general hotness of The Sex or Le Sexx (c) my very vocal aversion to Jake being too heavily involved with spandex-wearing, and (d) my even more vocal aversion to ANYTHING involving man-sandals or man-clogs does NOT constitute delving into Jake's personal life, then I'm good.

Why the post on Austin Nichols? Everyone knows why they are being linked, and it's not because of plain friendship. Why was the WFT link there at all if the blog focused on jake's sexuality from day one? It's not to argue, I'm just sayin.

I'm sure that said nothing about Jake. And Brits sometimes goes off topic! Also i think the link for TT is no more!

Anon 1.57, there's also a link on JW to my blog which is all about liberalism in American politics. It doesn't mean that JW ever had anything remotely to do with the subject matter I write about.

The links are reciprocal but stay up only as long as brits is comfortable with what she is linking to. Regarding the WFT link, there's been bad blood there for a while. I'll even take the blame for its removal. I never post over there and I stayed out of the argument as much as I could, but I've been pushing for a long time to take the link down since I didn't see how this blog was benefiting from it.

And the post about Austin steered clear of his sexuality. If you want to read more into it, you have every right to that. But the whole point of this post is to say that such issues aren't going to be openly speculated here. That's all. :)

muffin 12:02 I SO agree, muffin. There are plenty of places to go on the web to indulge in that kind of thing. The internet, to a large extent is about fantasy. On the internet, I can be 5'8" and weigh 105 lbs. instead of being 5' and weighing 138! I guess the point is every blog has its own point and sets its own tone. I love Gilded Moose!And truthfully? I wouldn't mind so very much reading about Jake having fun table dancing with Paris Hilton. Only, if they announce their engagment, I think that's one party I'll have to miss...being in the hospital and all! I just adore Jake. Wouldn't want to participate in anything hurtful or disrespectful of him, ever. I guess it's about boundaries and judgement.

I'm breaking my promise of radio silence, after my abysmal failure to recall "Ring around the Posey"I'm much more confortable in making fun of our selfves. Which the whole agent angle provided. and genius on Brit's part.I'd like to think he could visit here read the postings and have a laugh, not come across anything hurtful or mean. I've made note of the time used, in this interruption in my aforementioned silence. And will add it to my 24hr sentince so it can be still honored with some integrity. Simon

Well, I love Jake and Jake Watch but I'm calling bullshit on this whole "no personal life discussion thing". This blog is awesome and always makes me smile and I think it's really sad that someone is trying to bully britpopbaby into censoring herself by saying Jake is uncomfortable. Like if she keeps doing it they'll take the link off his dad's site? Or Jake won't like us anymore? Or Jake won't talk to us anymore? Please...

If nothing is gonna change then why was this mentioned? I'm sorta confused. I agree with squallcloud's original post. I don't think it's cool to try and control what people say, (seems like that is what Jake and his family are doing which I think is surprising and, well, lame, to be frank) and imo no one here is disrespectful.

Will posts be censored if something is said that is considered out of line?

Brit, I see pride prevented you from allowing PG from handling the head transplant this time.

LMAO! I would have but sometimes PG likes to pretend she has a job and acts all busy.

I think it's really sad that someone is trying to bully britpopbaby into censoring herself by saying Jake is uncomfortableNo-one is censoring us or bullying us, anon. Please don't read it in this way. At the end of the day the blog is not affiliated with any Gyllenhaal and we can do and say what we want. But it's a personal choice - I believe that I'm not in any position to speculate or question Jake's private life. I also believe that Jake Watch has never really done this to a particularly offensive degree. I just want to make some people laugh, maybe Jake is one of those people.

Well, where did she get this info that Jake was uncomfortable with people discussing his personal life? Surely not from Jake himself. So clearly someone (pr person, the dad's publisher) is the one that told her that and tried to flatter by saying Jake Watch is responsible, etc. Maybe britpopbaby could set us straight on how this all went down so we could understand better.

dkbb said: Oh I do so love taking the moral high ground - it's usually much more lightly traveled, don'tcha know?! ;)

LOL, dkbb! I agree, and I trust that britpop and PG will make sure JW stays the funny and wonderful place it's been so far! As long as I can study Jakey's socks in detail I'm happy... ;-)

Is it wrong of me to want to say "Congratulations, bpb"???

Oh, great news about the t-shirts, and I can't wait for the new layout. (The James Bond theme started when I was on vacation, and I felt stupid trying to get into it when I got back - all the good Bond girls were already taken. ;-))

It was said for any future things that might show up. A kind of disclaimer.

Will posts be censored if something is said that is considered out of line? No-one here has ever said anything I would consider that out of line. I can't control comments so you can say what you want. It's your opinion and people will be able to see that.

Good on ya guys. All hail the Jakewatch team! :) As far as I can tell from the comments the consensus seems to be no to dicussions about significant others or sexuality and yes to those on clothing choices (especially socks, yay) and pets. R.E.S.P.E.C.T. and all that jazz...kudos to the JW community ;)

Kokodee I don't know?....it's like that mouse trap game ...you put the ball in one end and you have no clue where it will come out.But Be Warned: Miss Bearded Lady can crawl into the gutter with the best of them!...no one that wants a peaceful nights sleep, dare provoke my acid tongueMy days as a socialite are behind me now ,and at 104 you really don't care what others think. I have no image of graciousness to maintain.

There is no talk here of censorship. But perhaps those posters who don't like what Britpop and PG have decided can go elsewhere for their Jake fix and leave those of us who are more than happy with the way things are run here to enjoy ourselves in peace.

im anon 1.57 - i'm not labelling any actions in any particular way, but I don't buy the just because Austin Nichols post issue, maybe it was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, I don't know. And I still feel the same way about the WFT link - that blog (which doesn't particularly relfect my view on th TT thing) has always dealt with Jake's personal life the same way, so if there had been on interest in that approach, it should not have been there. I respect the decisions made though I don't agree with 'em. I guess the best is to just let go of the thing and visit whichever site makes you feel more comfortable. Cheerio.

Well, where did she get this info that Jake was uncomfortable with people discussing his personal life? Surely not from Jake himself. So clearly someone (pr person, the dad's publisher) is the one that told her that and tried to flatter by saying Jake Watch is responsible, etc. Maybe britpopbaby could set us straight on how this all went down so we could understand better.

Sorry I missed this before. Please just use common sense. You honestly think Jake would enjoy discussions about his private life? His friendships and relationships being torn apart by people who don't know him and never will? It's irrelevant where I learnt this and of course, it wasn't Jake himself. I'm not saying you can't discuss it, it's a personal thing. I have no contact with Jake's PR or anything like that. You just have to ask yourself what your comfortable with.

Anon 2:48 PM, I would hardly call what is happening here Tom Cruise- like. Brit has explained the situation. I think not being rude to Jake's friends/relationships/family is respectful, not Tom Cruise controling.

Btw, Heath Ledger has the same situation with Theresa at HeathLedgerCentral. She knows him and respects him and his privacy. If you have contact, be it direct (Theresa - HLC) or indirect (Brit - JW) with a celeb than respecting their wishes does not mean you have to censure all that is said by others.

Before Grandma would strike me with the buggy whip as a little girl.She say (after spitting out her chewing tobacco) "do on to others as you would have them do on to you"...course that was easy for her to say as she had the whip and I didn't.

IMO a public figure has to, gracefully, give up some of the privacies afforded to others - the trade-off being that they receive millions of dollars to appear in films, receive world-wide accolades and privileges most do not, and best of all, never have to slog off to the subway every morning in 90-plus heat to sit in an office all day. Jake certainly would not have the opportunity to cycle with the 7-time Tour De France champion if he was an accountant working in midtown. And he's said that - that the past year have brought him incredible opportunites on an almost daily basis.

On the other hand, I have certainly vocalized my aversion to things like Ted C and his "Blind Items" because I believe it's destructive to publish thinly veiled and extremely personal items about people, whether or not they have any factual basis.

MANY people here have commented on that fact that they feel a bit sad that, in the past year, Jake seems to be HOUNDED by these guys. IMO the paps that follow Jake around on a daily basis are a DIRECT result of those TT blind items, and not because he was in Jarhead or Brokeback or any other movie. These guys don't REALLY want pics of Jake eating a sandwich (but I DO - LOL - I admit it!) they are hoping for pictures that can add whatever "fuel to the fire" they think will sell more photos for more money. I love Gilded Moose because she picked up on this - ergo her hilarious items like "BREAKING NEWS: Jake Gyllenhaal crossing street!"

So I guess it's a line everyone needs to figure out for him or herself. For example, I certainly don't mind sharing my OWN Jake Watch agent experiences when trying to spot him when he's in my West Village 'hood. However, if I happen to know a famous person's address because, well, because they live a block away and I see them all the time (no, not Jake!!) that's information I'm keeping to myself, not because I am a selfish bee-yatch unwilling to share, but because, for me, that would be an incredible invasion on someone's personal space.

So Brit, I'm all for you finding the balance that works for you, that makes you happy in order to continue this blog!

I find the whole 'Personal Life' a bit vague. Does that mean if he gets a girlfriend we shouldn't talk about it? His friends his family? This is all part of his Personal Life. I think what they are trying to say is 'Just follow the script that we have asked the paparazzi to photograph for you.'

The real point is probably along the lines of 'We don't want Jake linked to Austin.' I am more of a poster to WFT but I do read JW and have found it much more fun and enjoyable that IHJ.

My only real disappointment with Jake is if he starts the dating the co-stars thing. How dreadfully boring, even if it is Natalie Portman (who I like a lot.)

Jake Watch is the perfect place for me. I love the British spin and the ironic approach to the whole Hollywood experience. I'm interested in Jake G (natch) but my comfort zone does not include detailed speculation about his private life; for me that goes against everything that attracted me to JW in the first place.

No-one is judging posters who get into the whole rah-rah of speculation and if that is your bag there are plenty of Jake specific sites and general gossip sites out there.

What is wrong with keeping JW unique and different from other sites, why should every Jake site and blog turn into an extension of the one before?

JW always handle Jake’s private life with respect. It will be difficult to discriminate the borderline of privacy. The price of JW fame is tricky. On the one hand the site is evolving but on the other hand the restriction could be a product of self-consciousness (we know that the stalkers are stalked!). The decision to go towards the Gilded Moose’s direction is intelligent. Britpopbaby’s humour is unique. We trust your judgement about the limit of topics.

press now, Jake does not tell the paps who/what to shoot. These people come from all over the world and NO WAY would they give up a big $$$ shot at ANYONE'S request. It's just not done. The paps are not controllable like that lol.

Well, going by the main post where it says: "It’s been relayed to us here at Jake Watch HQ that Jake doesn’t really appreciate discussions about his personal life."

The word "relayed" sounds like it was info "intentionally" passed down through Jake. Anyhow, it's the choice of BPB as it's her blog, I totally respect that, but as another user said I don't really agree with it. It's not because I want to talk about his personal life either,not at all, I guess it's just the idea of being "asked not to" that seems too controlling to me. That is all.

It's a bit strange that people who seem to have a problem with britpopbaby and prophecy girl's merely stating they're going to be respectful of Jake's feelings are the ones who usually claim that all "fangirls" (and there's a broad stroked brush if ever there was one) here care about is talking about who Jake's going to date next.... Erm, last time I checked this blog wasn't founded around that, unlike oh... WFT? Seems like they're the ones who're a bit hypocritical and overly invested, not us.

The word "relayed" sounds like it was info "intentionally" passed down through Jake. Anyhow, it's the choice of BPB as it's her blog, I totally respect that, but as another user said I don't really agree with it. It's not because I want to talk about his personal life either,not at all, I guess it's just the idea of being "asked not to" that seems too controlling to me. That is all.

It's been repeatedly stated that the comments here are in no way censored. Since you don't have the opportunity to post blog entries, there is nothing even remotely controlling about this. Also, let's not argue semantics. The information is private and I think delving into what you choose to believe vs. not believe is what got us into this mess in the first place.

It looks like everything is going to be just fine, but it may become a little harder if/when Jake is seen hanging around a potential (but unconfirmed) new girlfriend. Like, if you found pictures of him giving a girl flowers a la Natalie, are you allowed to hint that maybe you think he'd be dating her? Would your new boundaries prevent you from minor speculation, even if your comments were respectful? I'm not trying to bait you, bpb, but I'm curious.

That said, I think you're making a good decision by setting a responsible example instead of outrightly banning everyone from certain types of remarks. Bravo.

Paparazzi photos violate an actor’s “private life” unless they serve a convenient agenda (promotion / image). We can justify the use of them by saying they are in public domain and the purpose is humour and irony but they are still exposing private moments. If JW will still comment on paparazzi photos (either to discuss how sexy Jake is, his socks or dogs) the site will be still feeding the abuse of privacy. The definition of “private life” is indeed very tricky.

As PG said, as no one other than Britpop and PG have the ability to post blogs then the issue about what is and isn't private is really nothing for anyone other than BPB and PG to worry about. Everyone else is free to leave whatever comment they feel necessary.

NRM, Boo certainly appears to be terribly sweeet but I can't help but notice a glint in his puggly eyes than hints at a plan for world domination.

Well I can only recall Brit using the censor power one time. She's tolerated alot. it's her blog . We are all guests here. I would not blame her should she find it necessary in future to use that power again. That she cares a great deal for Jake and his family is clear. Why should a blog which has her name so to speak on it have anything she would feel hurtful or embarassing to her on it?So I'd say Brit use the censoring tool if you think it's best and don't apologize for it or explain for that matter.Nothing should be out there that brings embarassment to you.So don't feel you would hurt me, or anyone who cares to understand by doing so. The rest can take a jump in the lake.

Actually it is quite common for the PR people to let the papparazi know where a celebrity is going to be for important photo ops. It isn't every set but a lot of them are like that.

The best recent example of one in which paparazzi were given the heads up is the whole Lance, Jake and Matt series. While not every set was the result of a call the very first lot was. They are try to create buzz around Jake and the Lance Armstrong picture.

A good example of a pap shot that wasn't the result of the PR folks would be the pictures of Jake and Austin just walking together on the street during the day. It was also a indication by at least one paparazzi that they knew where to get pictures of Jake and Austin together. I think that since then Jake has been doing double duty on the paparazzi front in order to placate the paparazzi give them lots of pictures of Jake and they leave Jake and Austin alone.

I have to ask a question. Do you think that Jake and Austin are at all hanging out together like they are supposed to have before? Jake and Austin are still friends aren't they? If they are then why no pictures? It isn't that they are not popular, look at the reactions to the few we have see so far. There are of course all sorts of permutations that could be going on behind the scenes. For one it wouldn't surprise me if Austin didn't want to delay the coming out for a year or more so he can make a name for himself that isn't linked to Jake. All else said if they came out now, for most people, it would be Austin who? It could also be the case that he really is single and straight, which still begs the question were is Austin?

This of course all comes down to the main reason why Jake's people don't want his private life discussed, it leads to thinking about it and at the moment it just leave you asking 'Are you single?' to which the answer is 'You could say that.' but does saying make it true.

brit says nothing will change. She also says that she don't mind lurid fantastical accounts so I'm cool.

It's the difference between believeing that Jake is TT and talking about him as if he is which yah, that's kinda disrespectful and merely taking note of how pretty he looks with other dudes. The problem comes when "don't discuss his personal life" is translated to "He's not a fag so all you fangirls/boys who think he is better go to WfT with that shit!" That's not brit's atittude and that's all that matters.

Yes they do. And yes, it's a difficult point. We've discussed it before and I'm not settled either way. I do however think there is a difference between looking at a pap pic and saying, 'Jake looks hot' or 'Jake is offering to wash their windscreens' and on the other hand doing a breakdown analysis of what it all means. Again, it's personal If you want to scruntinize pap pics go ahead but I have other things to do like job hunt and drink gin.

press, are you referring to the Ellen interview? Yah I thought his answer to are you single was interesting but that could also be because he's not seeing anyone in particular. He is a 25 year old man who is FINE AS HELL. I'm pretty sure folks are linging up to knock him off. Not saying he's partaking but if he were he might wanna keep that off blast.

Goddamnit! I'm talking about his personal life. This sucks because what about talking about the personal life he states in interviews doesn't it become public life at this point or am I playing a game of symantics?

3:53 Chris and I believe a dude named Amos have been billed as Jake's best friends according to interviews with Jake. Austin and him are friends but I never heard the "best" friends from any official source.

Why do so many people want to change the unique approach of JW? If the way that the site is run is so "off" for folks why not just go to one of the other sites? It's not as if there is a shortage of Jake-centric places.

3:55pm thanks for responding I'm glad it's not just me. And here I was wondering if I was in the Twilight Zone and had just missed something somewhere. Maybe britpop can pass some of that gin she's drinking I wouldn't mind a swig! ;-P

That reminds me of a story I was in a restaurant and saw it and said to my mum, must have been loud. I’m not eating that how nasty does it look? I waitress must have overheard I never got any on my plate but my mum did!

...totally off-topic, BPB - but for the "€" symbol just press "Alt gr" and the "$" key at the same time, et voila!~J, your helpful eurozone pal

p.s. the (slightly) new direction for the blog sounds good to me. As long as you continue to take the piss out of Jakey G, I'm happy. My preoccupation with the man is less worrying to me when combined with a healthy dose of slagging ;)

TBL, hello right back!!! I'm afraid I must be going now. I've got to pack. I've got a business thing tomorrow and Friday (oooh, I sound so official, don't I?) and I'll be out of commission. NRM, you think 7 is bad (which, OK, it is)...I have to get up at 3:45 to make it to the airport (!!!). I'm slightly queasy just thinking about it. I'll try to check in before I go to bed, but everyone be nice to brits while I'm gone. I told her I'd play bad cop if I needed to. Seriously, I don't think you guys have anything to worry about with this blog. ;) Ta!

i may sound bad but i love to get into jakes personal life but if everyone eles has agreed to stay out of his bussiness then i will too! and i respect you more now bpb for thinking of jake in such a nice way!!

I love Julia Child! Altho, I always thought she had an agressive streak...I mean I used to watch tapes of PBS show just to watch the way she'd slap that pork butt around....which may say more about me than dear Julia...

i may sound bad but i love to get into jakes personal life but if everyone eles has agreed to stay out of his bussiness then i will too! and i respect you more now bpb for thinking of jake in such a nice way!!

Here is a question you should send back to the person who asked you to put a hold on the speculation about Jake's private life. Ask them if they had contacted any of the papers or magazines that have been speculating about Jake and Natalie to stop?

If they haven't and I really don't expect that they have then what we have here is plain and simple homophobia. It is interesting that Jake once said he did mind if people thought he was bisexual. Has he changed his mind?

This is SO totally off topic, but I wondered: The first time I watched Jarhead,was when it came out and it was ok. But then I watched it a second and a third time more recently.(last night.) I've concluded that Jake really should have been nominated for an Oscar for Jarhead. He was beyond extraordinary. Yeah, I loved watching him strutting around all buff and he's got an incredible body and I seriously love it, but I'm talking specifically about the fact that the more I see him in a role, the more I appreciate his acting ability. When I first saw BBM, I was all Wow! Heath was incredible...and he was. But it wasn't until my second viewing that I really appreciated what Jake had done. And now, it's Jake's performance that still makes my heart ache.(Even Annie Proulx said she didn't know where Jake's Jack Twist came from!) Has anyone else had that experience? Or was I just slow and dumb not to full appreciate him the first time out of the gate?

"Ask them if they had contacted any of the papers or magazines that have been speculating about Jake and Natalie to stop? If they haven't and I really don't expect that they have then what we have here is plain and simple homophobia."

Moonbeams -- I know what you mean about Jake on multiple viewings. Although first time I saw BBM I couldn't understand Heath at all so I focused on Jake and loved his Jack, each time I see it I am more amazed by his performance -- so understated and nuanced, which can be said about his work in all his films. Even Bubble Boy in a way (which I love). I think our culture is so used to being hit over the head with everything that most don't get subtlety at all.

I think your in the majority actually, moonbeams. I heard that a lot but I was the EXACT opposite. It took me multiple viewings to realize just how over the top amazing Heath was because I could hardly take my eyes off of Jake the whole time. They both did put their left foot in those performances.

I thought Jake was fantastic (and totally hot) in Jarhead. Peter on the other hand was under used and over praised for Jarhead. I loved his breakdown scnee but it was too little too late. I wanted MORE of Troy. I know Sam wanted to keep the mystery but damn. The Dying Gaul was wonderful.

"In the time of your life, live so that in that good time there shall be no ugliness or death for yourself or for any life that your life touches. Seek goodness everywhere and when it is found, bring it out of the hiding place and let it be free and unashamed. Place in matter and in flesh the least of the values, for these are the things that hold death and must pass away. Discover in all things that which shines and is beyond corruption. Encourage virtue and whatever heart it may have driven into secrecy and sorrow by the shame and terror of this world. Ignore the obvious, for it is unworthy of the clear eye and the kindly heart. Be the inferior to no man, nor of any man be the superior. Remember that every man is a variation of yourself, no man's guilt is yours, nor is any man's innocence a thing apart. Despise evil and ungodliness, but not men of ungodliness or evil, these understand. Have no shame in being kindly and gentle, but if the time comes in the time of your life to kill, kill and have no regret. In the time of your life, live so that, in that wonderous time you shall not add to the misery and sorrow of the world, but shall smile to the infinite delight and mystery of it." -MF DOOM

Pressnow et al: Britpopbaby didn't say that anyone had told her to put a hold on the speculation about Jake's private life, to quote your words. You make it sound like she's following orders when all she's said was that she heard that Jake doesn't appreciate discussions about his personal life, and so she's decided for her future blog entries to keep that in mind and adjust accordingly. Go back and read it again. What about that is gender specific? Cause I'm missing it.

Sounds like she wants to act on her own good conscience. Her choice. Why is that so hard to understand?

And might I add that throwing around a word like homophobia whenever something, in this case a person's sense of common decency, rubs you the wrong way is extremely offensive.

I think such descriptives are used too promiscuously. And I think their use is often designed to engender guilt and place people on the defensive when it is totally without any justification whatsoever. Personally, I find it very offensive that to eschew speculation about someone's sexual orientation immediately labels one a homophobe. Funny. Here we all are, many of us in general agreement that BPB is doing the right thing to be respectful of Jake and his familyand not speculate about his personal life/personal relationships and some of us find this to be an occasion to continue to speculate. Even worse,are the inferences that somehow someone was bullied or someone did a "Tom Cruise" or anticipates censorship on someone's private blog because she has chosen to go in a particular direction.Some people even depict this as a situation where the young man in question is likened to some inanimate object discarded like a toy one has grown tired of. But, to be rational for a moment, he is a person who happened to make a film with Jake and then one with Kirsten at a time when Jake was flying over to the UK to spend time with his girl. They were friendly for a while.He hasn't "disappeared." It's possible that HE electd to distance himself from Jake when so many people went into overdrive with all this rampant speculation about the nature of the friendship. Or maybe, nothing at all happened and things just ran there course. We all have people from different points in our lives with whom we are friendly for a time and then kind of lose touch with for a time. Friendships, especially if they are rather superficial,(as is often the case when working on films) often ebb and flow like that. These are different from those whom we consider our nearest and dearest friends for life. To feverishly grab hold of a scenario to fit some fantasy because Jake is seen walking down the street with or working out with someone (or cycling with someone) or because he smiles at them at a bball game the way he smiles at just about everybody he's sort of friendly with is just not rational. (I've seen pictures of Jake with Mark Ruffalo looking way more friendly and affectionate!)In the case of the young woman in question: There were actual photos of Jake sitting on his haunches, waiting patiently for his lunch date. When they met, they embraced and he gave her flowers. A few weeks later, she flew in from a location shoot outside Vegas to attend a holiday party with him. They leave the crowded venue for a stroll on the beach. So the magazines speculate; ergo people are homophobic. I think if it's so vitally important to speculate about the poor guy's personal business, and I think specifically about his orientation, there are lots of places on the internet to do that. If BPB elects for JW to NOT be one of those places maybe people who need that in their lives ought to go elsewhere where they will be more comfortable.

I don't really understand how one can say we need to stay out of his personal business, but still support and post the pap pics. They are invading his privacy in the most blatant way possible. Snapping photos of him that he isn't aware of when he's out shopping, biking, walking, eating, or out with friends and family, and then posting them to view, it is an inescapeable contradiction to the whole privacy issue here.

It's possible that HE electd to distance himself from Jake when so many people went into overdrive with all this rampant speculation about the nature of the friendship. Or maybe, nothing at all happened and things just ran there course. We all have people from different points in our lives with whom we are friendly for a time and then kind of lose touch with for a time.

Not really sure why you aren't mentioning names while you're talking about them but in any case...while each of these situations could be true. It could also easily be true that they still have a great friendship (or whatever) and are simply avoiding being photographed. It's not as though we see Jake at every moment of the day.

@Moonbeams...I have been hooked on Jake since Donnie Darko so I always have an immediate appreciation for his mere presence on screen. I do understand what you mean about Jake's performances making more of an impact on you with repeated views. He's just such a versatile and skilled actor that sometimes on the initial viewing you don't see a character. You just feel that you are watching someone live out an excerpt of their lives, only later do you realize that he's acting...and doing a damn convincing job of it! That might explain the AMPAS oversight!

@BPB & PG... Do the damn thang anyway you choose!! Stick to your convictions! This is a dignified place we're cultivating here...fuckin dammit!!

That's what I think some people don't get the big deal about. Why would it be specifically about his sexuality that would be the problem? I understand that it ruffles people's feathers moreso than other private life speculation, but why? What is so different about speculating about him with a girl compared to him with a guy? Nothing that I can see. It seems off-putting IMO for one area of speculation to be supposedly more acceptable or more comfortable than another area of speculation. It's because of that attitude that pushes the belief that someone's sexuality should be a big issue.

There were actual photos of Jake sitting on his haunches, waiting patiently for his lunch date. When they met, they embraced and he gave her flowers. A few weeks later, she flew in from a location shoot outside Vegas to attend a holiday party with him. They leave the crowded venue for a stroll on the beach. So the magazines speculate; ergo people are homophobic.

Take this for instance, while I don't think someone is homophobic for speculating on this interaction than the other, it doesn't seem all that different to me. While it's true they hugged and he gave her flowers, their body language in the pictures didn't show anything besides them being just friends. They didn't appear to be a romantically/sexually interested in each other IMO. The holiday party thing also didn't strike me as odd given that people would logically rather spend the holiday with friends and from all reports, Natalie flew a greater distance to Argentina and there didn't appear to be any holiday excuse for that one at all. You started this statement out by saying "there are actual photos" but there are actual photos of him with Austin as well and if people think there is something in their body language that was missing in the body language he had with Natalie then I don't see why one speculation is any better than the other.

"It could also easily be true that they still have a great friendship and are simply avoiding being photographed. It's not as though we see Jake at every moment of the day."

Yes, so true. Just because we don't see it doesn't mean that they aren't still friends. We don't see Jake 24/7 and we aren't hearing his phone calls and seeing his in house visits. I think this is one of the weird things about pap pics, we can sometimes start to unconsciously define the person, their life and relationships by what we see in the pics. We often think we know more then we really do.

What a load of bollocks.You can't be Jakewatch if you are banning talking about him personally?

I think that's a good thing,but the title is not fitting really.And you won't want your er,agents keeping a damn eye on him will you.Another invasion.Might as well give up the whole thing or redo it all.

Wow! Well if we're reading body language,let's speculate on Mark Ruffalo!I thought I even saw him with some pink tulips! LOL!We speculate bcz WE DON'T KNOW!! And that's the point really. The 'word' on Nat was "just good friends." It seemed to be accepted for the most part. No problem. With Austin, there's an entirely different dynamic. Different even from Lance and Matt and Chris. The 'word' on Austin, at the time, was that they're friends. But it seems some people can't accept that. So there's speculation. I can't think of anything more personal or private than a person's sex life. IF THE PERSON CHOSES TO KEEP IT THAT WAY, I respect their wishes. I'm not judging one as against the other. You have no way to know if people are "avoiding being photographed together." That's pure speculation. And you can believe that the paps would be on it big time! The paps are motivated by money. Period. And so are the tabloids. And their snide jokes and comments everytime Jake is seen with a guy are demonstrable to me that they have another agenda. There is a latent hostility and a "gotcha" game going on that I find repulsive. I would hate to pander to it. The viciousness exhibited by some paps during BBM promotions hasn't gone away. The paps don't silently take their photos and scurry off. They often say vile, insulting, hurtful things. Fortunately, Jake seems to be boring them to death. Gotta love it! But I totally understand his desire to try to avoid speculation where possible. I support it. And now, to quote todays headline"Good Night...and Good Luck."

Jake Watch is a responsible site, so much more so than a number of others out there. That responsibility doesn’t detract in anyway from it being an inviting, welcoming, fun and supportive place to hang out.

Pap pics will exist regardless of any actions taken here. Things like “Sock Watch” & “Boo Watch” et al funny. They are not derogatory, there is nothing insinuated about Jake as a person. I believe that the harmless way in which you use these pictures when compared to other sites is to be applauded.

We’ve all I’m sure been in a situation where someone has taken a picture of us and whether because of the situation or the composition of the picture, it was funny or embarrassing in someway. Usually we would share it with our friends and have a good laugh about it.

Now I know none of us are Jakes friends in real terms, but that is the spirit of Jake Watch. Yes, slightly wacky with the secret agent personas and all, but a group of people who admire and respect Jake and his work. So Kudos to you for reaffirming that this is the spirit in which Jake Watch will continue.

It makes no difference whether someone has said “Jake doesn’t appreciate…” or if BPB just happened to think how she would feel if someone did/sad a certain thing to/about her.

Would it be such a bad thing to stop and think, “how would I feel if that was being said about me”?

Personally I think this blog is right on the money, a humorous and thoughtful caring community. Long may it continue.

I am in total agreement with no discussion of Jake's private life on the blog. Speculation on whether someone is gay/ straight/ bi is not a neutral topic. Peoples lives and livelihoods can be adversly affected by such discussions. Those who say discussing gay rumours is no different from discussing and speculating on straight relationships are being disingenuous. Everyone is aware speculation about a male actor being gay can hurt his image. Those who say that shouldn't matter and that to allow it to do so is lacking in integrity are being equally disingenuous. An actor depends on his public image the same way that doctors, lawyers or accountants depend on their practising certificates. Anything which harms that aspect of their professional life potentially harms their livelihood and them. Also all the discussion about who Jake hangs out with / is potentially dating (whether gay or straight) and disparaging comments about them is likely to be upsetting. How would you like your freindships and relationships discussed and picked apart by people who don't know you or them.

We have all commented on how nice Maggie and Peter look together and have sent good wishes for the baby. I don't think that is 'discussing someone's personal life'. I think the line between that and speculation/ gossip/ unkind remarks is clear.

Well if we're reading body language,let's speculate on Mark Ruffalo!I thought I even saw him with some pink tulips!

Well if he did indeed get some tulips good for him. Obviously being sarcastic but would point out that associated receiving tulips as automatically having a romantic implication strikes me as pretty archaic.

You have no way to know if people are "avoiding being photographed together." That's pure speculation. And you can believe that the paps would be on it big time!

No kidding it's speculation but you were just speculating that they weren't friends anymore due to lack of pictures and I was pointing out that there was another possibility out there that was just as probable as your speculation. As for the paps being on it, I'd think you could realize that they could easily hang out at each other's houses or someplace that they aren't usually spotted at that the paps wouldn't know where to look. The paps aren't all-knowing beings. We've had a couple of sighting of Jake hanging with Heath, one of which was confirmed that they were together by someone who would know and yet there were no pictures for those events. You bet the paps would have killed to have snapped Heath and Jake together so I think Austin and Jake could easily avoid them to if they wanted.

The paps don't silently take their photos and scurry off. They often say vile, insulting, hurtful things.

And so is the name of the business. If they weren't shouting homophobic slurs at him, they'd be shouting something else to get a reaction. If they can get a reaction, preferably an angry one, then all the better because the photos will make more and they may even get to nab some attention. No celeb, esp. not any A-list ones, are free from that.

Those who say discussing gay rumours is no different from discussing and speculating on straight relationships are being disingenuous. Everyone is aware speculation about a male actor being gay can hurt his image. Those who say that shouldn't matter and that to allow it to do so is lacking in integrity are being equally disingenuous.

Sorry but I don't see a difference between the speculations. Both wondering if he's dating a girl and wondering if he's dating a guy is prying into his personal life and I don't think that either is worse to speculate on. There are plenty of male actors who have gay rumors about them. It's how they react to those rumors that can affect their career not the existance of them. To add to that, I realize that image is extremely important for those in this business. That's what I find all the sadder when someoen says that gay rumors can hurt that person's image because then that obviously leads to saying that if the person were to come out then that would also negatively affect their image which leads to the reason why so many celebrities keep themselves closeted. If people didn't make such a big deal about sexuality and the need to keep it supressed or hidden away then I personally don't think it would be thought of as so damaging because it would be no big deal.

Anon:That's what I find all the sadder when someone says that gay rumors can hurt that person's image because then that obviously leads to saying that if the person were to come out then that would also negatively affect their image which leads to the reason why so many celebrities keep themselves closeted.

It leads to saying that there are potential consequences in people disclosing information about their sexuality. It is sad that that happens. However it's a fact of life. Saying that is the case did and does not make it so, and does not lead to people not disclosing information about themselves. Discrimination and prejudice made it so and leads to people not disclosing information about themselves. That is the existing situation.

If however someone chooses to come out they are affecting their own image and have chosen to do so. They are in control, aware of any potential consequences have weighed the options and made a decision. Very different from being subjected to rumour and speculation and having to 'react'. Why should anyone have to react to, and potentially be harmed by, rumours about stuff that is nobodys business but theirs?

If people didn't make such a big deal about sexuality and the need to keep it supressed or hidden away then I personally don't think it would be thought of as so damaging because it would be no big deal.

I agree. But the key word is 'if'. People do make a big deal about it, to the extent that peoples lives and livelihoods are affected by it. That is the reality at the moment. Hopefully it will change. How I do not understand how discussing rumours about someones sexuality will help that process.

Sorry but I don't see a difference between the speculations

I think you answered that yourself at point two -some people do make a big deal out of it, and that can be harmful. I practise discrimination law and one of the most difficult things to prove is discrimination in recruitment. No one (or at least very few-I have had one or two cases of crass stupidity!)comes out and says you didn't get the job because you are female/ black/ gay/ have a disability (or equally that you are male/white/straight).

That kind of discrimination is usually underground and is not easy to prove and therfore not easy to fight. That is why I advise, for example, people with mental health impairments not to disclose them at the recruitment stage. There is no legal obligation to do so and research shows that many potential employers would discriminate in recruiting a person with a mental health impairment if they were aware of it.

Why should people be forced into disclosing information about themselves, or be subject to rumours about themselves, that can potentially harm them? A wise person once said 'It is a fool who tries to be honest with the dishonest'. The arguement is completely twisted around the wrong way. I have a certain characteristic that others don't like. I know if they get information about that characteristic they may use it to my detriment. I don't disclose it. I am then the one who is wrong for not disclosing that information. Doesn't seem logical to me. A conscious choice by someone to disclose that information and to deal with whatever consequences ensue is an entirely different matter from having to fend off speculation and have my every word, gesture, friendship and acting role analysed for evidence of gayness or staightness.

"That's what I find all the sadder when someone says that gay rumors can hurt that person's image because then that obviously leads to saying that if the person were to come out then that would also negatively affect their image which leads to the reason why so many celebrities keep themselves closeted."

Exactly. There is definitely a distinction being made here in regards to gay and straight and how it's preceived by society as a whole, and therefore consequently in terms of hurting an actors career. Whatever the circumstances, perpetuating such a stance is still wrong. You can pussyfoot around it all you want, but that is ultimately what this is about.

Can't see the difference? One is intrusion (unpleasant but par for the course for a celebrity), the other is vile, mean-spirited and hurtful.

I don't mind people making gentle, genial fun speculation about his sexuality, but some people go just that bit further and make what I think are hurtful, bitchy and damaging comments.

And why do people think that it is Jake who is offended by being called gay? Is is not more likely that Austin is the one offended and decided to stay away from Jake, and Jake is upset that he lost a friend?

Why are you using the word "young" in your example of the boy? That just sounds weird, so bad example. Would be the same if it was a "young" girl too.

Obviously the reason the Austin pics received so many comments was because of the body language between them. That's fairly normal, I'd say, whether it be a man and a woman or a man and a man. If I saw pics of him with Natalie Portman with the same body language I'd wonder just the same if there was more to their friendship. And I don't think one should be considered more hurtful then the other. Both speak of his private life and make assumptions. Once we see one as more hurtful then the other we get into the territory of gay being bad. That is the bottom line.

"And why do you think it is Jake who is offended by being called gay? Is is not more likely that Austin is the one offended and decided to stay away from Jake, and Jake is upset that he lost a friend?"

Why "young boy"? Because there was some pap pics of him playing basketball with a young boy? You seem to be deliberately missing the point.

Well, "body language"! I could have sworn that he is in love with a huge number of men from the way he looks and interacts at them. Jake must be a promiscuous gay then. We'll just ignore the obvious observation that he is naturally affectionate with people, men or women.

If you don't want to see why some speculations are more damaging than others, then there is no point in discussing. Really.

anon 9:50 wrote:Obviously the reason the Austin pics received so many comments was because of the body language between them. That's fairly normal, I'd say, whether it be a man and a woman or a man and a man. If I saw pics of him with Natalie Portman with the same body language I'd wonder just the same if there was more to their friendship.

I guess what you see in body language is open to personal interpretation too. When I look at the pics of Jake and Austin I see two close friends. They're laughing, smiling and having fun - no difference between that and how I act when I'm around my friends.

I just don't see why people need to speculate. What's so goddamn interesting about it anyway???

Why is it so important to some people to speculate about Jake Gyllenhaal's private life that they feel the need to start huge arguments with britpop about her decision to have a no-speculation policy for her own blog???

Well, I don't see having a dissenting opinion as starting an argument with britpopbaby. I think most people here are stating their feelings in a non-confrontational manner, why they agree or disagree. It's BPB's blog, she can do as she likes, we all know that, and I'm sure that shortly everyone will have their feelings out of their system and things will carry on as normal.

"Why is it so important to some people to speculate about Jake Gyllenhaal's private life"

It's not, it's the principle of the matter that is actually the hot topic here.

Saying that is the case did and does not make it so, and does not lead to people not disclosing information about themselves. Discrimination and prejudice made it so and leads to people not disclosing information about themselves. That is the existing situation.

Except it does lead to people not disclosing info about themselves because it starts getting taught to people at an early age that it is wrong or something to keep hidden which will then continue to color how they hold themselves as they grow older with those beliefs. Of course descrimination and prejudice make it so but by shying away from talking about it, it does also contribute to that.

Why should anyone have to react to, and potentially be harmed by, rumours about stuff that is nobodys business but theirs?

Nobody should have to but it exists in every form esp. in the business that Jake is in. That's why magazines like US Weekly, People, etc and blogs like Perez, Pink, and even this one exist. Because no matter what, pretty much anything we assume about Jake is a potential false rumor. Even if we were to look at a picture where he is smiling and say, wow he looks like such a happy person, it could just as easily not be the case. Whose to say which rumors Jake feels more affected by?

some people do make a big deal out of it, and that can be harmful.

I semi-addressed it but the fact is that any rumor could harmfully affect Jake. Him being known as some kind of druggie diva could potentially be a lot more harmful than a rumor about him being bisexual. Hell like the article on After Elton even said, I'd bet that Mel Gibson would rather just have gay rumors out there about him rather than all the names and accusations he's facing about his image right now.

A conscious choice by someone to disclose that information and to deal with whatever consequences ensue is an entirely different matter from having to fend off speculation and have my every word, gesture, friendship and acting role analysed for evidence of gayness or staightness.

But the problem with this is that no matter what Jake's every gesture, word, role, etc will be analyzed for something. Whether it be about his sexuality or about his personality as a whole. Again depending on what conclusions someone comes up with, any of those have the potential to be more or less harmful than the other. I remember people here analyzing pics of Jake with his mom (they were outside at night at the time) and people were speculating that he wasn't as close to him mom and stuff like that. Who knows, maybe Jake finds that more insulting than people thinking he could be bi.

But IMO that kind of speculation is vastly different than the kind the majority of people make when it comes to his sexuality. When it comes to seeing the difference, most recognize the difference between thinking someone is gay/bi and thinking they are a pedophile. Those that don't understand the difference between the two need some personal help with their issues.

I suppose I have to belabour the point. Pap pics are just that, pictures, nothing more. Unless they are of the most intrusive kind, they are usually just of minor irritation to the person targeted by paps.

Speculations are different, ranging from the good-natured ones which no one minds, to the down-right offensive. Yes, I deliberate chose an offensive one just to illustrate the difference. Even with speculation about his sexuality, there is a world of difference from saying "Aw, Jake and Austin sure make a great couple" (yes, they do look sweet together), to "Jake is a homophobe to deny that he is gay" or "Jake's out with his latest beard on PR exercise while Austin pines", or "Austin is clinging on for dear life to Jake for all the publicity he can get". The later ones are just nasty which I have seen them said in a number of blogs and forums. If BPB wants to keep the nasty ones to a minimum, then all power to her.

Pap pics are just that, pictures, nothing more. Unless they are of the most intrusive kind, they are usually just of minor irritation to the person targeted by paps.

I disagree. They're more than "just pictures" because the paps that are behind taking those pictures aren't exactly known to just silently stand there and observe the celeb their photographing. They tend to yell out to that celeb and they've even been known to set up circumstances to catch a celeb in a certain premediated action (case in point, the supposed homeless guy that Jake was asked to give money to actually having been paid by the paps to get a shot with Jake). They make snarky comments and I have a hard time believing that Jake and his family didn't feel intruded upon during their Mother's Day walk.

Speculations are different, ranging from the good-natured ones which no one minds, to the down-right offensive.

Speculations are a part of paparazzi pictures because the pictures are most often the ones that help push rumors and speculation due to whatever body language the celeb is displaying towards whoever he/she is with. The paps know that which is part of the reason they do call out things to the celebs because they would love to get some good reaction shots. Nothing makes more money than getting a popular celeb to do something embarrassing or angry.

The later ones are just nasty which I have seen them said in a number of blogs and forums. If BPB wants to keep the nasty ones to a minimum, then all power to her.

Well I'll agree with that. Because while I do think that Jake is bisexual, I would never make rude, hurtful comments about it.

I'm particularly interested in the insight about everyone being storytellers. We make up stories that include ourselves cast as the protagonists. Everyone seems to be running a little movie inside his or her head.

You can see that here as well. We have all made up stories explaining what's going on in the papparazzi photographs, attributing motives & emotions to Jake.

The only difference in the JakeWatch mission statement, near as I can make out, is that Brit isn't going to dream up relationships as part of her storytelling.

That leaves me relieved, actually. I've never heard so much about "body language" as I have on blogs whenever a single photograph of a celebrity is under discussion. Everyone's a self-appointed expert in it. But everyone's got their own idea of conflict & a happy ending when making up the story, which is bound to influence what they see.

Which is fine, as long as we realize that the stories we're telling are just that: Stories. Not necessarily the truth.

Disclaimer: www.jakewatch.com is a blog for entertainment purposes only. We are not associated with Jake Gyllenhaal or his puggle. All images belong to their respective copyright owners unless stated otherwise.
Credits: Site designed by www.jakewatch.com Do not reproduce.